Controversy Surrounding the ‘Advertiser’ Newspaper and East London Mosque

In February 2014, there was some controversy regarding East London Mosque (ELM) blocking Shaykh Muhammad ibn Adam from speaking at their premises due to an article which appeared in a local newspaper (East London Advertiser) indicating that the Shaykh had ‘extremist’ views. Obviously – as is the case, sadly, these days – the newspaper article sensationalized his quotes and articles, and took them out of their intended context.

Many people complained to both the newspaper and East London Mosque
management. ELM released a statement on their website saying they had
NOT blocked Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam from speaking at their premises and
that there was a misunderstanding in this regard. The newspaper also
removed the article from their website after realizing they had made a
mistake.

Below is what Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari wrote on his facebook page directly after the incident:

Important Message

Some of you may have today come across the controversy surrounding
East London Mosque (London Muslim Centre) blocking me from speaking at
an event planned there for yesterday, organized by the Inspire Youth
Group. The ‘Advertiser’ newspaper today released this report titled,
“Medieval Muslim cleric’s speech blocked by London Muslim Centre.”

If what is stated in the article is true, in that the ELM management
did block me from speaking at the event, then it is very sad indeed. It
is expected from the enemies of Islam to malign those who teach Islam by
taking what they say or write out of context – and there seems to be a
systematic witch-hunt by the media to ‘bring down’ popular Muslim
scholars/speakers by sensationalizing their views – but for a mainstream
Muslim organization to be pressurized into banning speakers, without
investigating or even asking them directly about their views, is very
sad indeed – to say the least!

This is not the first time it has happened to me. A few years ago, I
was invited by the Islamic society at York University to deliver a
lecture, but some of the groups there – such as the Jewish society, Gay
society, etc… – wanted to ban me, claiming that I was an extremist,
homophobic, rape-legitimiser and hate preacher!

They basically picked up some of my fiqh answers/articles on our
Darul Iftaa website, and took what was written in them out of context. I
eventually did go and delivered the lecture at York University, since
the Islamic society Masha Allah were very strong and did not succumb to
the pressure. Many non-Muslims attended the lecture, and it generally
went down well with them. Some of them even said that they were misled
by these groups and the local media, and after hearing my speech they
were convinced that what was claimed about me was untrue.

The same thing seems to have happened in this case too. Certain hate
bloggers and so-called journalists wrote articles questioning my
attendance, prior to the East London Mosque event; but rather than
question them or investigate, it seems the management took the easy
option to prevent me from speaking.

This evening, the East London Mosque management denied they banned me
from speaking at the event, saying: “The ELM has not banned Mufti
Muhammad Ibn Adam Al-Kawthari. We have no issues with matters, as
clearly defined in Islamic jurisprudence raised by the Mufti.” ELM
management has assured me that some miscommunication may have taken
place, and that they will do a press release very soon stating that I am
not banned from speaking at their venue. We give them the benefit of
the doubt, and eagerly wait for the statement, In sha Allah.

Nevertheless, what are these views of mine considered by these
journalists and reporters as so vile, dangerous and extreme? In the
‘Advertiser’ newspaper, the reporter Adam Barnett described me as “A
Muslim cleric who “calls for the amputation of limbs as punishment for stealing” and “supports stoning to death for adultery!”

The term “calls for” gives an impression that I am basically on a
mission to enforce Shari’ah law in 21st century Great Britain and that
anyone who steals a chocolate bar from a corner shop in East London, his
hands should be amputated, and me and my friends keep knifes in our
cars in case we catch someone stealing! It also gives an impression that
I want anyone guilty of committing adultery in the UK to be stoned to
death, and that we keep stones and rocks in our cars in case we find
someone committing adultery! Subhan Allah, what absurdity…

The reality is that the articles written by me – and posted on our
website – are academic and research-based answers given in light of
Qur’anic texts and hadiths and clearly defined in classical works of
Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). Such rulings can be found in virtually
every book on Islamic jurisprudence. Who does not know that the Islamic
legal punishment for stealing is amputation and the punishment for
adultery is stoning to death or 100 whips – of course, subject to
certain strict conditions? I have merely expressed the standard and
classical Islamic viewpoint on such matters. These punishments are of
course only implemented in a proper Islamic political system and under a
certain context. I do not, in any way, call for or endorse amputation
in non-Islamic countries such as the UK, where people choose not to have
Islamic law. Islamic legal punishments are only applicable under a
proper Islamic state and, as such, I was merely discussing the subject
in an academic and theoretical manner.

However, the reporter failed to highlight the proper context in which
I expressed these views. He says that I ‘call’ for these ‘medieval’
punishments; but does not inform the reader as to when I made this call,
where I made it, and in what context I made it. It was certainly not in
the context of Britain or any other country where people choose not to
have Islamic law implemented. I was simply presenting the Sunni view on
Shari’ah Law in regards to these crimes. Even non-Muslim academics on
Islamic studies will inform you of the exact same thing, in that
Shari’ah Law advocates (as per Qura’nic text) these punishments for
these crimes.

As such, the news article is highly misleading and factually
incorrect, and does nothing but adds to the growing Islamophobia that is
taking place in our country. The fact is that reporters such as this
individual have a fundamental problem with many aspects of Islamic
teachings, but to cover up their dislike they mislead people and act as
though it is an opinion held by one individual. After all, I only
presented aspects of Islamic law, implemented in an Islamic state,
subject to strict conditions, as understood by mainstream Islamic
Scholarship throughout history.

Finally, I would like to thank all my brothers and sisters from the
UK and across the world who sent me messages of support and reassurance.
May Allah bless you all, and reward you for your concern and standing
up for the truth, Ameen.

I would also encourage the readers to complain to the newspaper and
the journalist in question and ask them to give an explanation. As for
the East London Mosque, we give them the benefit of the doubt and
eagerly await their press release. They are also under immense pressure,
hence I do not wish people to turn on them. We all need to stick
together in such situations, support one another and stand up for the
truth. May Allah make matters easy for us all, Ameen.

Muhammad ibn Adam al-KawthariDarul Iftaa (UK)February 2014

________________

Brother Shiplu Miah (of Engage) sent an email of complaint to the
journalist who wrote the article Mr.Barnett, and after receiving a
response, here is what he wrote in his reply

Sensationalism and Lies

1. It’s evident from the link you have provided that Mr. Kawthari is
talking about Shariah Law; something you also acknowledged in your reply
to me (“Mr Kawthari was asked about the punishment under Islamic law
for stealing”) – therefore I find it absurd that you think that he is
making a “call” for such punishments here in Britain. He is simply
presenting the Sunni (including Shia, I believe) view on Shariah Law in
regards to these crimes. You may want to even consult non-Muslim
academics on Islamic studies, who will also tell you the exact same
thing; that is that Shariah Law advocates (as per Qur’anic text) these
punishments for these crimes.

Given that the link you have provided clearly states (repeatedly)
that these punishments are what is prescribed under “Shariah Law”, your
article was indeed very much misleading, and factually incorrect …
regarding the “call” he allegedly made.

2. You said: “But even had he done so, the idea of cutting off hands
and feet to reduce petty crime is generally considered outrageous
wherever it is practiced or proposed.”

i. As I mentioned above, it is clearly evident that he was talking
about Shariah Law and not what the punishment should be under UK law. So
I fail to understand why you say “But even had he done so”.

ii. “Generally considered outrageous” – That’s your opinion and
that’s fine. And I am not going to dispute that. However if you wanted
to write an opinion piece on why Shariah Law is outrageous, then that’s
your prerogative and you should have done that; what I am complaining
about is that you wrote a news article with misleading information. You
finding the Qur’anic punishments as outrageous should not have led you
to lie and mislead the public. Mr. Kawthari presented the Islamic Law
(Shariah) as has been understood by mainstream Islamic Scholarship
throughout history; in fact, Dr.Usama Hasan, who you quoted – his father
Dr Shuaib Hasan says that exact same thing as what Mr. Kawthari says.
Where you got it completely wrong (either deliberately or through a
genuine mistake) is that you have equated the presentation of Shariah
Law as a “call” to implement these punishments here in the UK; that is
where you went wrong.

3. “In this context then, you may want to reflect upon who it is who
is giving your faith a bad name – journalists, who report calls for
violent punishments considered medieval by many Muslims, or people like
Mr Kawthari.”

i. I haven’t seen anything wrong from Kawthari to feel that he has
given a bad name to Islam; you have misrepresented the facts, and that’s
it.

ii. I blame both, nut-job Muslims and nut-job journalists, who are contributing to the growing Islamophobia in the UK.

iii. It’s evident from the article and now from the explanations you
have given that you were not simply “reporting” as a journalist ought
to; you just have a high dislike for Qur’anic punishments and decided to
sensationalise your reporting in light of that dislike you have. Your
dislike and hatred for the Qur’anic punishments isn’t the problem; the
problem is you allowing that hatred to then make your reporting unfair
and misleading. I hope you understand this point.”

Darul Iftaa (Institute of Islamic Jurisprudence) aims to provide insight into the Islamic perspective on personal, social, and global issues. We hope to enrich understanding, debate and discussion by providing an Islamic dimension to queries and specific concerns.